Lumion Support Center

Support for unlicensed users => Post here if you can't find your License Key => Topic started by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:53:10 am

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:53:10 am
First of all congratulations for your wonderfull software. I am an architect and i've been loking for something like that for ages. I understand this is the first version so i would like to suggest some improvements as this software can be so much greater.


The terrain tools need a slight improvement and that would be the cut option (straight not circular) so you may cut straight the terrain around the placed building. This is very useful for buildings placed on hard grounds.


You need more water types and by that i mean water for fountains and/or rivers. A wave effect (texture) in areas near the shores would be very spectacular.

Car number is ok but cars with people in them driving are definitely a must. It is just weird to see cars moving around with nobody in them.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:56:01 am
People in more positions are a must. I would suggest people sitting on (chair) and layed down (on a bed let's say)


More work is needed on the import object settings. First of all there is a problem with the placement of a building on a spot. If you already have modeled the terrain in that spot the buildingwants to get on top of the terrain and is very hard to position on the right spot. I think that it would be way better that imported objects do not reaction to changes of the terrain. I mean when you place the building is should stick on the ground but when you make changes to the terrain it should stay at previous level. Many times when you try to build the terrain around the building it lifts up.


There are also problems with reloading materials after changing in sketchup (it does not always place the materials as it should). Also, it somehow changes the position of the building to where it was first. I think the software should recognise the new position of the imported building and replace the modified one in the same place, so you do not have to place it again after reloading.


The interior renders are ok, but sources of lightning should definetely be added. I don't know if it is possible with this engine but global illumination or some kind of v-ray like render for interiors should be added. If not other way possible it should be great just for static renders. This will not be a complete software until high quality interior renders are implemented. 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:56:51 am
The material queue for a imported object should be bigger as for interior renders you need lots and lots of materials.


A bug i've found is when saving after placing moving objects in a scene (people and cars) when you reload the scene and play the movie objects are messed up, trees are moving instead of cars or people etc, so you have to redo the movement all over again. This should definetely be fixed.


Some fishes would be great for underwater environements.


For effects i would add a bubble like effect for underwater scenes. Also, a must in my list would be the introduction of a text with a tv-like effect. One similar to windows movie maker would be great. If not, there is no problem, it still can be made in post production.


This would be great for on-going description of the project during the movie.


A basic fire material effect should be added for that great fireplace scene. Smoke may also be a nice addition.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:58:26 am
Tools for accurate terrain modelling are also a must. I have used you sistem with bitmap import and it was ok, but not very very acurate. There was however a slight modification in height as you have 255 shades of grey in most softwares and you should have 200 shades for each meter. A different sistem should be created. Keep in mind at all times that your software should be for architects, do not lose focus.


Architects do need accurate terrain (not artist, game like work), google earth import of large terrain areas would be great. In its current configuration the terrain maker is more aimed at gamers and it was hard to me to make something close to reality with it. The option to add CGIAR-CSI geospatial images from google would be great, as the plugin and google earth are free, everybody can use them easily.


A street maker should be made. It should be intuitive and easy to use. You should draw lines after the real autocad files (splines or straight lines on the ground) and then the software should stick them on the ground. If you push them up the software should automatically design a bridge or elevated highway. A city engine like approach would be the best in my opinion. (but it should be even easier to use) In my opinion this software should be used for creating ambiances around the buildings for visualisation and virtualisation. Therefore the proffesional design is made in other softwares like allplan, archicad, revit, etc.


What lumion should do is create quick, fast representations of ambiances around the central object that is the building. This is why other software failed, because architects should already learn very hard software and  learning gruesome softwares like 3Dmax just for creating the ambiance around the building is not something you should follow. Therefore this software should keep it simple, fun and easy to use. This attributes really can beat all competition because let's face it, after a lot of work on the building design who needs 2 weeks of work just to animate some people and trees and make the environment around the building... 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 06:58:57 am
Moving wheels for cars should be added. Also cars and people should have pathes (curved) to follow.

The cameras have a little time between each other, they do no flow one after another. Although this is not necesarily bad, there should be the option to make them flow one after another with no interruption.


An option to place a collection of plants in a brush like style would also be great. Anoying thing is also the placement of trees on top of each other when placing forests. There should be a option to stick trees only on the ground.


There should be a phisics system that recognise people and cars position and places them correctly, as far as i;ve seen if they move and the terrain changes height they stay in the air. There should definetely be interaction with the ground.


In the future, effects like rain, snow etc should be great additions, but they're not a must yet. Still they would make some very nice presentations. Also, painting snow, dirt, etc (or an automated process for this) on imported objects would be great.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 04, 2011, 07:01:25 am
Exterior light, clouds, water effect, sky, sun and fog are simply perfect. I have no comment on them whatsoever. I do feel sorry for the interior lightning system though. Texture ilumination baking and such is such a no-no for me. At least an internal system for that should be added. Let's say for example i add light sources to interiors, and lumion calculates and applies the textures for illumination as required. This should get good results and stay in the "fun-to-work" area.


For the object library i would add flying vehicles, helis and planes. Also, more boats like large ships (they would be great in the background in ocean scenes) A nice effect in the future would be that boats recognise water surfaces and move slightly on the water. There should be some people just standing still and moving just a little. The animated people provided just keep moving like crazy people so you must put them toghether so they do not seem nuts but just talking to each other. (joking) 



Thank you so much for this wonderfull software and keep improving it. You are so close to perfection with this gem. Please keep up the good work and don't mess it up. Stay focused on the main purpose of this software that is architectural presentation, spectacular and simple to be made, fast and easy to render.


PS: the competition (twinmotion) totally sucks :) It doesn't even import my huge models, and lumion does it in seconds. Stay ahead of them and you will soon have the market. That should not even be very hard :)

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 04, 2011, 09:28:07 am
We are already creating more water types. From ocean with shore to fountains.

 

We also want people in the cars as well as rotating tires.

 

Sitting people is indeed important.

 

You can already lock a building so that it doesn't lift up when painting the terrain!

 

We already have a reload that works like you describe and I am not sure if you used the update but that already fixes an issue we had with materials.

 

We will add lights but we won't add VRAY type renders. For that you need other software. We believe our fast renders are our niche if we try to get better quality then VRAY we our out of our league.

 

The update already has more material slots.

 

If you know how to reproduce the moving bug please let us know.

 

We are working on fishes right now.

 

We had a text overlay before but it wasn't good enough for release. We will bring this back this year of course.

 

We already are working on smoke and fire.

 

We where thinking of adding geotiff support but any advice on how architects get in correct landscape is welcome.

 

One problem we think we will have with roads and sidewalks is that we won't be able to recreate it like all possible combinations in the world. So we wonder how ussefull a road builder is since you can also do this in skechtup.

 

We are thinking of letting people paint a square and we just animate people in it. The same with cars.

 

There already is an option to place trees on our ground. This is done by pressing [G] while painting.

 

We will add rain and snow but it won't 'snow' on the ground just in the air for now.

 

We will keep adding content to our library and all suggestions are welcome. We don't know what people need but we are only interested in things more architects will need.

 

Thank you for trying Lumion and lets hope we stay focused :)
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 04, 2011, 09:35:17 am
Trainz Simulator 2010 ED seems to have some nice features that share a high similarity with Lumion.

http://www.ts2010.com/videos.php

If a track/road editor like featured in their movies could be integrated into Lumion that would be very sweet.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Morten on January 04, 2011, 11:08:54 am
Hi Gabriel, I just wanted to say thanks a lot for taking the time to post your detailed feedback on your first few weeks with Lumion. Posts like these are extremely important to us as the points made often confirm the concerns that we (and other users) have regarding the major issues which we would like to address in future updates.

Early adopters like you, Aaron, Simoni, Cpercer, Sliner and all the rest of you put up with the rough edges and motivate us to keep going with your valuable constructive criticism – and of course your cool entries in the user gallery.

We'll do our best to make your projects shine in 2011… and beyond Cool
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 12:54:49 am
Yes, trainz simulator seems pretty close to what a road creator might do. I saw a image in their movie creating a railroad, that is the way it should work, simple &fast. Indeed roads are easy made in sketchup, archicad or allplan. BUT and there is a big BUT here, it is very hard to make them leveled to the ground, at least with the softwares i am used to work with.

Most of the time you make streets in 2D and the ground is flat, and that is fast and ok. You draw the street borders, the streets, etc. For example i have allready made settings for the heights and colors of street with textures and etc. After that i just draw in 2D the roads, street borders and give them all their heights. Allthrough this works well for flat terrain it al becomes tedious for leveled grounds. So in my opinion this is where lumion should come to help. 

So for the road maker i suggest the following (from my perspective as an architect). 

In the first place there should be a method of tracing the streets after the real ones from a dwg file of urban planning. Usually they come as a vectorised project or bitmap (jpg, tiff, etc) or they may be traced after images from google earth. I would love to have a layer for example in which to put the file with the road shape (be it vectorised (on scale) or not, this should be the two methods, and a scaling option for bitmap should be provided)

 

The true greatness of the software would be a procedural road. First of all let's face it. It IS VERY HARD to make intersections for roads with traditional software (and harder to make changes to them for that matter). In my opinion the roads do not necesarily need to be from different countryes, they should have just the bigger parameters implemented, and after that different texures and objects applied to them would make them look more american, european etc.

 

By main parameters i mean the section of the road. This is what urban planners use to define a road. This is definetely something you should take into consideration. I think what you have in mind is more like a puzzle combining the roads. Different types of roads at a size and you put them one after another like you do with fences or bushes now. I think this should not be the approach.

 

You should be able to control the main parameters of the road like: size of one lane, numbers of lane, size of sidewalk, size of middle ground (for large boulevards or highways.) Some basic aditional options should be provided like let's say if there is or not a safety belt for the highway, or other accesories on the side of the road. I would recomend 2 different types, one for roads (highways) outside of city and one for city roads. (because outside roads do not have sidewalks) What matters most is lane size, and sidewalk size. Borders and other accesories should be added automaticaly. A great relief would be adding automatic textures for borders (which are very hard to produce for curved roads, and I never really had time for this)

 

After you set the main parameters of the road you should be able to just draw a line on the terrain (curved or simple) and then the software does the rest with your desired section of the road. After that slight adjustements should be made possible from key points (to move a intersection for example) .Pedestrian crossings should be added where you need them by dragging a square.

 

The key is that after you make the road modeller you may give the apearance of let's say paris, or london, or new york with aditional objects that you place, in my opinion just the main parameters of the road (which are the same for all countries) should be automaticaly made by the software.

 

So in conclusion the following steps should be followed:

-a way to insert bitmap from google earth and/or vectorised scaled file (dwg) to draw road after

-a scripted simple road that follows section modifiable by the user

-section of the road easy to change (a image of the road section where you drag sidewalk and each lane of the road to desired length)

-roads that follow the level of the ground

-aditional objects to create ambient for american, european or custom road

-possibility to change road texures with the ones you desire

-simple way to draw markings on the roads (pedestrian crossing, priority, etc)
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 05, 2011, 09:29:05 am
Thank you for your insight. We will be looking at roads at some point. We already had some road tests here but nothing we wanted to put into the release for now.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Morten on January 05, 2011, 10:50:20 am
What you're describing is not impossible, but is certainly a massive undertaking for any company as infrastructure projects can be extremely complex.

Apart from the section-based "basic" roads you mentioned, throw in underpasses, overpasses, bridges, multi-lane roundabouts, all of which need to be able to join up seamlessly as well as working traffic lights from multiple regions and reasonably "intelligent" motorists and pedestrians and so on, and you've really got your work cut out! Smile

It sounds like you already have some experience with designated infrastructure design software such as InRoads, MXROAD, AutoDesk Civil 3D, Cadian, Carlson Civil etc. If so, it would be great if you could elaborate on specific reasons why the software you tend to use fails to meet your needs (e.g. you mentioned that it was hard to create intersections using "traditional software"), so that we have a better idea of how Lumion might fill that gap in the market place (assuming there is a gap we can fill). Is it to do with the ease of use, lack of core features or …?

Thanks again for your valuable feedback!
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 11:04:46 am
As for the terrain the building is on, it usually comes as a tiff or pdf file with level curves or height points. The software i am using lets me insert height points one at a time, specifying their height. Then the software produces a triangulated surface of the land you introduced. While this would be hard and pointless for lumion to do, what is should do is continuing from there. 


For example i make the house and the land on the property, but let's say i make a presentation with all surrounding area, ocean, mountains etc. Therefore i use the ground material from lumion for the layer of the terrain parcel the house is on and then i need to integrate it seamlessly into the big terrain provided by lumion. (the terrain area required for a aerial presentation may be as big as 10x10 km, as the horizon line is at 8 km in real world)

 

Now there are 2 options. I either make the big terrain myself or I import it from a real source to be as realistic as possible. As far as i'seen there are 2 available possibilities. One is importing data from SRTM here http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org/SELE.....tCoord.asp They should provide satellite height imagery, but I really do not know how to use the tiffs there, all I have obtained are B&W images of the region. 

 

The other option which is way simpler to use is importing terrain in sketchup, they have a cool option there. It would be great if lumion could take that terrain... exported as collada from sketchup. After you import the big chunk of terrain into lumion you may import your model with his own parcel and integrate it seamlessly into the big terrain took from sketchup.  There is however a limitation as you may only import maximum 2 km x 2km squares as far as i've seen. The results are good as far as i've seen and maybe you can stick together more of them squares.

 

The lumion import bitmap feature is good, but is better for computer gaming and such, where realistic land is not necesarily a must. It is way more creative, but is hard to produce realistic terrain with it, although i have managed to do it (but hard and not so precise, and needed more afterwork in lumion). It should import collada files in my opinion and transform them to lumion terrain.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 11:44:50 am
Morten said:


What you're describing is not impossible, but is certainly a massive undertaking for any company as infrastructure projects can be extremely complex.

Apart from the section-based "basic" roads you mentioned, throw in underpasses, overpasses, bridges, multi-lane roundabouts, all of which need to be able to join up seamlessly as well as working traffic lights from multiple regions and reasonably "intelligent" motorists and pedestrians and so on, and you've really got your work cut out! Smile

It sounds like you already have some experience with designated infrastructure design software such as InRoads, MXROAD, AutoDesk Civil 3D, Cadian, Carlson Civil etc. If so, it would be great if you could elaborate on specific reasons why the software you tend to use fails to meet your needs (e.g. you mentioned that it was hard to create intersections using "traditional software"), so that we have a better idea of how Lumion might fill that gap in the market place (assuming there is a gap we can fill). Is it to do with the ease of use, lack of core features or …?

Thanks again for your valuable feedback!


Well, i'd say what you described is waaaay out of what i had in mind. It would be incredibly advanced and wonderful if you could realise something like that but it sounds like a huge amount of work. No, actually i had way simpler things in mind.

I am an architect and i do not have experience with the software you mentioned. I have 10 years experience with Allplan & Autocad. I just played a couple of times with the demo of city engine, a good software but pretty useless for me so far. Also, hard to use to get desired results. You may see here how their road maker functions http://www.procedural.com/city.....reets.html Their sistem is however pretty advanced. I think something way simpler will do for now.

 

I will post some example of my work, to show you how traditional architectural software may work and look like. Right now, i make the streets as you see in the following pictures and import them in lumion together with the building. After that I make the terrain around the street to fully integrate it. Problems arise for non-flatten terrains… where roads as i made here (simple designs) are a tough nut to crack…


 





Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 12:11:56 pm
This is the result in 3D. In my opinion streets like these are more than enough, if they have the option to "stick" to the ground. In this example however, the street that goes to the building should've rised one and a half meter. As this task would've been tedious to manualy do in Allplan, i just made it flat. The side terrain as you see is terraced, and lumion's terrain should mold to that.

 

As for what you said earlier with cars and people in a box... I dunno.. look at my example... the sidewalks are curved... I really would need a curved path for each person walking. Not even in the park you may not put a square with persons... as you may see there is a fountain (in the circle) and it would be unwise to have people walking through the fountain. Also, people appearing out of nowhere in smaler boxes would also be unrealistic.

 

So in this case a box would be a total no-no.  I say the sistem is ok as it is, it just needs a curved path for persons (which shows when you chose the move object effect) After all there is no need for thousands of persons, i think for most scenes 20-30 persons are more than enough in my opinion, unless you use to design subay stations at rush hours :))))))

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Morten on January 05, 2011, 01:08:18 pm
I understand what you mean, Gabriel.

The reason I asked is that there's already quite a few specialised road construction applications out there and we need to know what it is that you (and other architects/urban planners/engineers) feel is lacking in the existing applications.

In your case, you're using Allplan for modelling (but no designated road construction software), so you would be interested in a tool in Lumion which would speed up your workflow when constructing "basic" roads, for example by letting you import 2D CAD drawings from AutoCAD as an overlay combined with spline-based extrusions of customizable 2D road profiles. And I gather from your posts that it's tedious to get terrains and roads to match up in Allplan, so this would have to be addressed as well in Lumion.

In order for us to determine if there is a niche in the market, it would be great if other users could chime in with their workflows, so that we can build a better picture of what the majority of our users need. Do you agree with Gabriel's ideas?

Do any of you use designated road construction applications in your CAD workflow?
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: mischa on January 05, 2011, 01:31:49 pm
I don t use other applications for generating roads. I mainly model them in 3ds Max. The preconstruction is done in Autocad.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 05, 2011, 01:43:00 pm
Same here as Mischa. 3dsMax for modeling and mapping of roads. There are lots of plugins but I dont use them much. Somehow they always fall short of what I need for a specific task.  This could be a hint to your question if there is a niche in the market. I think there most definitely is. Keep it simple and allow for importing of the most common formats concerning roaddesign. Make mapping and conforming to terrain a breeze and my guess would be the gods will reward you all with lots of camel and women.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Morten on January 05, 2011, 01:46:55 pm
LOL you can never have enough of those, Aaron…

Thanks for sharing your workflows, guys.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Frank on January 05, 2011, 01:48:00 pm
I model roads in Autocad. I think lumion is for visualisation, not a modeling tool.

But i agree with Aaron (including camels / women / residences and rollsroyce). Making roads in CAD is not one of my favourite things. 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 05, 2011, 02:00:35 pm
My main problem is that Lumion is not a modeling tool.

 

Since if you suddenly make a big road building tool you might need to export that again and that is a road we don't want to go on.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 05, 2011, 02:16:25 pm
I fully understand the pros and cons regarding possible integration of this feature. Like Frank commented, I'd be expressing myself gently when stating road modeling is not one of my favorite activities. Often I find myself finishing up a design and cutting corners where it concerns roads to make it come across at least somewhat integrated into its surroundings. As such I think, regarding a roadtool in Lumion, it would have to be looked at as a additional element inside the landscape editor. Not just pure fluff though but basic yet flexible enough to handle certain types of imports.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 06:44:13 pm
Lumion is not a modeling tool, but yet it is. How come it is not a modelling tool if you get to make ALL landscape in it with sea, mountains etc. If this is not modelling than what is? The design of buildings only? Dunno.. maybe i am missing something here. For me it seems a very good terrain modelling tool (best until now in the easy-fun-results factor), and as far as i am concerned roads are an important part of terrain and always around buildings and make a lot of the human made landscape. 

If by modeling you understand the tedious thing that i do now with roads then yes, lumion should never ever go that way. It must be as fun and easy as the rest of the tools. The power of lumion so far as i;ve seen is that it keeps hard things simple. It'll fool you with it' s simplicity, yet there's a tiger under the hood.

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Pete Stoppel on January 05, 2011, 06:58:59 pm
If there was a way to export the Lumion terrain mesh and open up in your choice of modeling app, one would be able to create the roads as needed that follow the terrain, maybe this could be a future option?
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 07:08:41 pm
I gave an example of how hard it is to make a curved road on a real non flat terrain. For example I use stairs to fool the software when I make ramps for basement parkings.

For me it is damn hard and a killer to make. I guess there are other softwares out there that make this quick and easy, but as far as I am concerned I am an architect not a engineer. I do not need very exact roads, they just need to be there for a integration with the building and landscape. There is no need for advanced sections through the road, building details of the infrastructure or such. Just a basic thing.  

This is a typical ramp for cars, took just 10 secs to build, but just try and make some border on that curved thing, and time increases to 5-10 mins because you have to make a plan out of it and stick a "wall" to that plan.

 

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 07:12:17 pm
Solo said:

If there was a way to export the Lumion terrain mesh and open up in your choice of modeling app, one would be able to create the roads as needed that follow the terrain, maybe this could be a future option?






Yes, i agree, but problem is you export the terrain to that software, make a road on the terrain with that software, than import it back, add people, cars and trees (and the building) and then render. This seems like a inapropriate way to work, bound to import/export errors especially for large areas.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 05, 2011, 07:19:34 pm
Also, i would like to point out that underpasses, overpasses, bridges, multi-lane roundabouts, working traffic lights from multiple regions etc, that somebody told about in a previous post ARE incidental objects, not used all the time, and they may be integrated seamlessly by the user with a little extra work and taken easily from google warehouse. There is no need to actualy have all that in lumion.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 05, 2011, 08:25:14 pm
Indeed imho it's kinda logical to have a great terrain editor, that even comes equipped with a material to seamlessly integrate terrain sections from imported models, seen extended with the same functionality where it concerns a important item in (urban)terrain design: roads. This however is not where the focus for ease of setting up your scene should stop. Again I point to Trainz sim 2010. With the same editor a fence is layed out around a house in seconds. Now try this in Lumion. The fences are there but I doubt you'll find many people enjoying fiddling with single units of fence or hedges to properly allign them around a sizeable campus, yard or officebuilding with many corners and elevations to tackle. The same doctrine applies for bassically every asset that you come across in most urban envorinments requiring array-style allignment and layout. Perhaps it would free the mind of some design burdens if the tool to be would therefore be conceived as a more generic layout assistant to give your scene a larger visual appeal then a merely exclusive road-editor would bring to the table. 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: mischa on January 05, 2011, 09:05:35 pm
If you add a road editor that would be great great thing, but then, after my opinion, an export function would be necessary.... (to import the model with the landscape and the roads into max for example).
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 06, 2011, 12:55:24 am
Yes but surely the same could (and already has been) argued about the product without a roadeditor right? As Lumions features will expand in the near future there will also probably be a higher demand for cross-application export abilities yet it has been clearly stated, at several occassions, the developers dont want to go there so perhaps its best to focus on where they do want to go and the possibilities for everyone within that framework ;-)
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 01:07:34 am

If you add a road editor that would be great great thing, but then, after my opinion, an export function would be necessary…. (to import the model with the landscape and the roads into max for example).

 


I still do not understand why on earth would you want to do that? There are tons of plugins for 3Dmax to do almost everything you wish from terrain, forests, roads etc. There is also Vue, that does pretty much the same thing. The main atribute of Lumion is that it is a fast render for movies! It renders at least 100 times faster than traditional CPU based rendering. Why on earth would i want to import huge scenes from lumion that i can render in 12 sec per frame into a software where i render a frame in 45 minutes?! I don't get it ... really...  It is made for productivity, and less time consuming jobs for architects. It is not made for computer gaming, v-ray renders and such...

As an architect I think it is unproductive to stay 2 weeks making a movie in max and another week rendering in a environment that i cannot even fully  control. (not to mention months of training and learning the software). After that, the client changes the solution and there you go... another rendering week. And what for? A better quality? Let me doubt that, from my 10 years experience, the best way is the fast and easy way to do things.

 Yea, there are gurus out there with stunning graphic results, contests won, etc, but how many of us can really get there? And why on earth would i wanna go there (that is learning a VERY hard software with thousands of pages to read) if i already have my job to learn and if I only need to impress a normal client with a future building not a international CG jury???? (those gurus are CG art oriented, they do not know how to design a building, they just "draw" it)

Needless to say this is the first version of the program, and i am more than sure that with light sources, GI, more stunning effects etc, the quality will be close to v-ray. Already the results seem stunning to me for a GPU rendered software. I've seen better results with twinmotion, but really i think they are hardly photoshopped, there is no way to get those results with that software. And even if you could... why have a miserable day working with a unoptimised software that moves like you'd have a 486 computer....

Why spoil perfectly animated water? Animated trees that move in the wind? Moving birds, humans, etc? I really don't get it!

The .max format is locked by autodesk and 3ds. like formats export only still objects, and many of them do not even export textures corectly...
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 02:09:04 am
Ah yes... I found it... Look, something free for sketchup, that is easy to use and depicts pretty much what i have in mind for the road builder...

http://www.valiarchitects.com/.....stant-road

 

Something like that (with same results) would be perfect, if it would adapt to lumion's terrain of course. Also, the interaction in lumion could be even simpler. (computer games building style)
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Percy on January 06, 2011, 05:19:23 am
firstly,thank all staff of lumion, you are do really painstaking and diligent,i'm glad to see you will add some water effects and weather,although it's only some weather effects such as rain and snow which in air,anyway,it's a important update.but most urgent thing or function,from my view,i should say is the function that modify or change the scale of object.lumion should be armed with this function which is so significant! will you add it in the next version?
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ecuadorian on January 06, 2011, 06:03:48 am
I guess since Lumion already looks so much like ModNation Racers, it was only a matter of time until its users requested "track" creation... Laugh

 

Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 06:36:48 am
Percy said:

firstly,thank all staff of lumion, you are do really painstaking and diligent,i'm glad to see you will add some water effects and weather,although it's only some weather effects such as rain and snow which in air,anyway,it's a important update.but most urgent thing or function,from my view,i should say is the function that modify or change the scale of object.lumion should be armed with this function which is so significant! will you add it in the next version?


I agree... Snow and rain are not a must, but they're nice to do in distant future. It;s not like you're gonna show the client the building in a rainy environment. Well, at least if it's not a building in England :) But it's cool to know you can do and good advertising. "we can also do THAT"

As for the scale, I did not miss it. What should i use it for? I am thankful that all is on scale so I can position them quick. That was a great problem in softwares like 3Dmax... 

 

What i would like to see (and not be very hard to do) would be another thing. I would like for example that when i place a tree 3 different similar versions of that tree would exist. Combined with random rotation and random scale in let's say a 10-20-%, a forest could become very very unique.


Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 06:44:26 am
Arqui3D said:

I guess since Lumion already looks so much like ModNation Racers, it was only a matter of time until its users requested "track" creation... Laugh

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....ZYdohW9r9g




Yes, something like that, but less "gamey-like" and less complicated, after all you're not really gonna drive on it. Errr... now that we are talking about that it just came another ideea! How cool would be if you could drive (by positioning) a car around (and the movie recorded from the car) to show how you actually enter the building, the basement parking places, etc? Then exit and continue on foot throughout the building...

I think it's a very nice ideea, and not to hard to realise in distant future.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Percy on January 06, 2011, 08:15:38 am
Gabriel said:

What i would like to see (and not be very hard to do) would be another thing. I would like for example that when i place a tree 3 different similar versions of that tree would exist. Combined with random rotation and random scale in let's say a 10-20-%, a forest could become very very unique.








 

Gabriel u have played cryengine2 i mean sandbox2, in that software,there are similar function called plant group,you can setup the plants organization and input some values such as height,density and so on, and each time when u plant the trees grass rocks with this group, it will generate different type of plants,different angle, different height,because all the value is random!so it's so natural that let us feel that the forest is made by nature not by humanbeing.in fact, it's a tool like custom plant brush. if lumion add this function, it's so cool and awesome! 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 06, 2011, 09:24:38 am
Here are some road tests we did in Quest3D which didn't make it into Lumion.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 06, 2011, 09:28:29 am
Any specific reason(s) this didnt make it in?
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 06, 2011, 09:38:06 am
What you see is modeled and this is the shader. For Lumion we did build all possible road pieces in the US. But that would only work as a puzzle and not snap to the ground. So in the end it was voted that if it isn't really good lets not use it at all. As heared here before a puzzle pieces road isn't what people want.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 06, 2011, 09:43:22 am
Ferry said:

As heared here before a puzzle pieces road isn't what people want.

 


All too true. 

Anything going on in this topic that could make you guys reflect on this issue again? (albeit with the 'really good' part included).
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 06, 2011, 09:57:00 am
We will do something with roads of course. But not sure what and when.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 11:09:47 am
There is no hurry, the software is very good as it is. I just want to point out to some future improvents (for months, years, etc) that could be made in future versions here. I think discussions like this could really help the dev team. By no means is this criticism or impling that the software is incomplete. Is just that seeing such a good software gets you thinking how many other cool stuff you can do with it.

 

And yes, puzzle road is a no-no for me. Used something like that in cinema 4D and i just could not get the right results, even with a ton of puzzle pieces (like 30-40 dunno) .Somehow they never seem to glue well around buildings. I would go with the modifiable section solution that sticks to the ground. It is way better in my opinion. 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 11:33:17 am
Percy said:

Gabriel u have played cryengine2 i mean sandbox2, in that software,there are similar function called plant group,you can setup the plants organization and input some values such as height,density and so on, and each time when u plant the trees grass rocks with this group, it will generate different type of plants,different angle, different height,because all the value is random!so it's so natural that let us feel that the forest is made by nature not by humanbeing.in fact, it's a tool like custom plant brush. if lumion add this function, it's so cool and awesome! 


 Yes i did. Cryengine is indeed great. By far the most impressive game engine out there. Sadly i did not play with sandbox but from what you're describing it is very similar to Vue. Yes, that would be a fine adition for massive forest environments.  

Still, what i've been saying with 3 versions of trees was for limited green spaces in towns for example. You have trees around buildings but one by one, 20-30 at most, not large forested areas. In architecture you need for example organised gardens where you want to plant the right plant where you want it to be, not every project has a jungle in the backyard you know :)


Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 12:11:00 pm
Aaron said:

 Again I point to Trainz sim 2010. With the same editor a fence is layed out around a house in seconds. Now try this in Lumion. The fences are there but I doubt you'll find many people enjoying fiddling with single units of fence or hedges to properly allign them around a sizeable campus, yard or officebuilding with many corners and elevations to tackle. 




Couldn't agree more! Just try and use those fences for a let's say... 5000 sqm parcel of land. Compare the time (and fun) in which you draw a line from point A to point B 100 meters far and you have a 100m fence sticked to the ground to the tedious affair of placing 50 segements of 2 meters each, rotating them and moving them to place. While option 1 would be a matter of seconds, option B is definetely a problem of tens of minutes, even hours for large parcels. Fast&smart&simple workflow should be the number one priority of lumion, it's what is needed in today's world.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Morten on January 06, 2011, 12:27:00 pm
You raised some very valid points above… at the moment, this is the thread I look most forward to revisiting in the morning.

I think we can all agree that array-based objects such as fences, hedges etc would definitely benefit from a line editor.

Regarding road construction kits, links to other solutions like ModNation and Instant Road for SketchUp are very inspiring and present a completely different perspective than hardcore infrastructure software like Civil 3D. Given enough income from Lumion sales it might speed things up a bit if we licensed parts of existing software and combined that with your requirements (like the customizable 2D road section idea), just like we've done with SpeedTree in the past, so keep those links coming… This is just my personal opinion though, and it's easy enough for me to say as I'm not the one who would have to do the hard work Smile
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Aaron on January 06, 2011, 01:03:39 pm
Take your time guys. With so many possibilities and options to choose from, I'm sure you'll choose wisely.

No hard feelings whatsoever if this means the road-editor won't be ready for release before early next week Wink
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 06, 2011, 01:13:01 pm
It is not hard for us to make tools to make fences really easy to place. Just like the space function right now.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 02:31:42 pm
The big architecture softwares that are on the market and by them i mean Revit, Allplan and Archicad (as the rest are not architecture oriented, or not worth mentioning... erm except for maybe Chief architect, good software but less known) have procedural railings. With them you can make almost anything that is repeating like fences, railroads, streets, etc etc.

They are however dificult to master, and allthough you can do almost anything with them there is a lot of invested time in doing what you need. I've seen some impressive results with Revit's family objects. Still, hard to master and i'm not such a Revit fan anyway.

As lumion is going for allready baked, maked, textured, moved, sized object area i am very happy as it takes away hours of needless work and puts them into creativity and design thinking, which are way more important for a architect than rotating trees, texturing hills and mountains and other tedious, boring tasks.

As for Civil 3D it looks nice, but seems very advanced, and maybe what lumion will do in 5 years or so regarding roads. I think we all here want just basic, generic roads around buildings, not even hardly textured like the ones you worked on. They only have to have sidewalks, borders and street lanes, that's it, and you may draw them like lines, straight or curved. Also they may be modified afterwards by drag and drop or similar sistem.

As for tunnels, huge road bridges, highways, railroads and many more crazy stuff like that... I guess projects that imply such great endeavours are pretty rare, and for that matter you can model yourself, import from google warehouse or buy advanced software like civil 3D and import them to lumion.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 03:23:55 pm
I had some time having fun with the demo from city engine here http://www.procedural.com/city...../2010.html  I was mostly interested in how it handles roads.

I'll take the trial from Civil 3D to see how it compares. Still, if it's from Autodesk i think you need serious training before using it. I am prepared for a waterfall of menus one inside another... 300 menus would probably suffice to make a 2 lane street with sidewalks :))))))
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 06, 2011, 04:58:52 pm
:P Exactly the opposite thinking method we used for Lumion
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: mischa on January 06, 2011, 05:06:21 pm
Hi Gabriel,

 

you are telling many true and interesting things (but some of the things you said had a bit a self-opinionated touch speaking bout 3d gurus and non architects). But please also accept that there are people who sometimes need a higher quality as you can momentarily achieve with Lumion even if they are like you architects! I am an interior designer and architect, so I often need very realistic renderings for demonstrating the quality of materials and so on. I mainly use Lumion for realtime presentations to walk around with the customer and sometime if I have  very shortdeadline and wanna have a movie. I agree with you that is is fun to work in Lumion and very easy to model landscape. That s why I would love sometimes to export my landscape and roads(?) to render them in higher quality in 3ds Max. Sometimes you need to model something according to the landscape, it would be nice to do that in 3ds max on the Lumion landscape object.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 06, 2011, 11:10:02 pm
Hi Mischa. Please do not take it personally. By no means i was trying to be offensive. Maybe my english is mocking me sometimes and other things are understood from what i say. What i was trying to say is that max (v-ray) and lumion are two different worlds. In my opinion, at least for now they serve different purposes. Also, as I stated before, the max format being closed, nobody can export to it. 

 

Secondly in my experience with exports, most of the times things happen wrong. And when they do, the hard work to repair commences. 

 

To better ilustrate what i'm saying please look at the following link: http://lumion3d.com/forum/gall.....cene-test/

 

Now you may see there is a v-ray render and a lumion render. I do not know about your clients but most clients i met require way lower quality than both of that renders. Frankly, most renders i've seen in architecture offices around here look, way, way worse than both. Still, there is no complain from the clients. Most of them want to see their future building as it may look, size, shape, materials, have a look around it, see some interiors, a walthrough would also be excellent. Most of the times I just showed my clients the raw 3Dmodel in allplan, not even textured, then made modifications after discutions and better renderings.

 

Now there's lumion, a tool to show close to reality (but not reality or better than reality like v-ray) projects. It is fast, it's cheap, it produces good results, and will be improved. After all it's very new technology in the field. In the example above you have a image rendered in 5 seconds and a image rendered in 25 minutes. I don't know about you, but if i'd be autodesk i won't be comfortable at all. I bet they're gonna come up with their own GPU rendered solution pretty soon. Or they'll buy Lumion or Twinmotion and triple the price. Twinmotion seems more like it as those guys have great love for clicking and thousands of little to no use functions and menus.

 

 I say just that: 5 seconds -25 minutes. Difference? Some pretty shinings of materials and way better light and shadow from GI. Trust me, most normal clients won't even know the difference looking at those two pictures. They'll say they're both beautiful.

 

If i'd be lumion staff i will concentrate all my efforts into still renders and interior renders. I would come up with a GI solution for still renders only, ontop of what it renders now. I would increase the  time required for GI still renders. A time of 2-3 minutes for a still render but with GI support would be very competitive. After all until now most people were testing their patience with hours of rendering. After that, there would be no competition at all. They will not be able to compete with that, because of the speed of work and realtime visualisation, the thing that is missing in a v-ray like solution.

 

There is another thing that nobody talks about.  How many pre renders do you make till you get the best from v-ray? 10? 20? 100? How much testing is needed to see if the materials made are the color and type you desire? How much per each render in draft mode? 2 mins maybe? So add hours of useless rendering to those 25 mins. In Lumion what you see is what you get and that my friend is a CPU render killer.

 

What i would also like to add is that i saw tons of wonderful v-ray images. But frankly, i look behind pretty glimpses and lightning.I saw superb images of well.. houses... ugly houses. Yet some think that by making superb pictures of movies somehow the client will leave the studio with a big smile and will agree to all the solution, no matter what that is. I say they are losing focus, as the main focus is the final REAL result. I made some buildings in my time, i know the difference between superb computer generated pictures and reality. They do not fool me. Sadly most of the time people are trying to impress more with effects and beautiful lighting than with what is really about in those pictures, that is, sadly, architecture. 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: mischa on January 07, 2011, 12:35:48 am
Hi Gabriel,

 

you are right that we don t allways need high end renderings. In architectural competitions I often use, lets say, something like a comic style. What concerns the smiling customer... Well after all we wanna sell something, why not by blending him a bit with effects? Don t tell me you allways show your customers the ugly areas of your houses Wink...

 

and yes I am doing many prerenderings.

Lumion is quick in rendering and the quality is in comparison of time unbeatable. But what concerns GPu rendering you are wrong. 3ds max has 2 new GPU renderers, but I am not so experienced with them, the first tries I did weren t so satisfying for me. Vray has also a realtime GPU renderer (I just downloaded the demo), can t tell you more about that, because I am normally working with mental ray, which has also a new GPU renderer.

 

So for quick movies Lumion is the first choice. But I can t agree that the quality difference isn t possible to see for "normal" people. There are big differences, like the reflections for example, which are a big problem. In Lumion they are just a cubic map, what is looking ok in realtime, but not allways in movies. The lighting is nice, but the material effects are restricted, I agree that that will be improved in future.

 

The possibility of animations are also very restricted (at the moment). When I am showing interior design I sometimes show different lightnings of  a room. Or I animate objects, like open doors and things like that.

After my opinion at the moment the strength of Lumion is the realtim engine. The customers love to walk around and through their houses and that they can decide where to walk and look and that in a great quality! I hope the lumion team will also work on this part, so that we will have collision detection for the ground and the possibility to export an exe file.

Don t get me wrong, I love Lumion, but at that stage I can t agree that the rendering quality of stills and movies is comparable to 3ds Max or other 3D Software packages like Maya or Cinema. As you say that are two diffrent worlds, each with pros and cons. But Lumion is the funnier part Smile !

 

What concerns the export problem: you are totally right. It will not be easy to export the landscape as a good mesh....

The Max format is closed, yes, but max and other software packages can import many formats, so that won t be the problem... 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 07, 2011, 03:40:43 am
mischa said:

you are right that we don t allways need high end renderings. In architectural competitions I often use, lets say, something like a comic style. What concerns the smiling customer... Well after all we wanna sell something, why not by blending him a bit with effects? Don t tell me you allways show your customers the ugly areas of your houses Wink...


Well let's say i try to keep the "ugly parts" at a minimum :)) And yes, usualy you don't really wanna show the ugly parts. I've met some architects that used to make only still images in great looking areas, so that the client would be happy for the moment and accept the "rear ugly solutions" If real time walking through the building would be possible in lumion, they would be out of business :))))) 


 

and yes I am doing many prerenderings.

Lumion is quick in rendering and the quality is in comparison of time unbeatable. But what concerns GPu rendering you are wrong. 3ds max has 2 new GPU renderers, but I am not so experienced with them, the first tries I did weren t so satisfying for me. Vray has also a realtime GPU renderer (I just downloaded the demo), can t tell you more about that, because I am normally working with mental ray, which has also a new GPU renderer.

 

So for quick movies Lumion is the first choice. But I can t agree that the quality difference isn t possible to see for "normal" people. There are big differences, like the reflections for example, which are a big problem. In Lumion they are just a cubic map, what is looking ok in realtime, but not allways in movies. The lighting is nice, but the material effects are restricted, I agree that that will be improved in future.

 


About that, I think the reflections are not ok. Not they are not good, they're ok but the problem is they are too big and not always reflect what they're supposed to reflect. Dunno maybe i'm wrong but in my tests it looked that way. For example in a interior rendering if you put an interior mirror, it reflects the trees outside.... even if it should reflect the objects INSIDE the room.. again maybe I am wrong. Also I think the reflections are huge compared to what they should be... Think a dev could tell us more on that...


 

The possibility of animations are also very restricted (at the moment). When I am showing interior design I sometimes show different lightnings of  a room. Or I animate objects, like open doors and things like that.

After my opinion at the moment the strength of Lumion is the realtim engine. The customers love to walk around and through their houses and that they can decide where to walk and look and that in a great quality! I hope the lumion team will also work on this part, so that we will have collision detection for the ground and the possibility to export an exe file.

Don t get me wrong, I love Lumion, but at that stage I can t agree that the rendering quality of stills and movies is comparable to 3ds Max or other 3D Software packages like Maya or Cinema. As you say that are two diffrent worlds, each with pros and cons. But Lumion is the funnier part Smile !


Yea, now that we're taking about that I propose a rifle and some grenades for the customers, and some LAN support also would be nice. They would love to shoot each other in their own future to be house :)))) Erm.. joke.. of course :))))))


 

What concerns the export problem: you are totally right. It will not be easy to export the landscape as a good mesh....

The Max format is closed, yes, but max and other software packages can import many formats, so that won t be the problem... 

 


Totally agree, but i've tested most of them and there are always exporting problems in most of the formats. Especially for very large scenes as the ones lumion provides, or for complicated objects like the detailed buildings an architect needs.  I've got some good results with fbx though and collada files. Luckily lumion has collada support. 3ds nah... bad. And the problem i stated before remains... How do you export the other great moving things lumion provides... there's no way... And there is the other problem with alpha made trees... they never export well.. as far as i've seen. Although I might be wrong... not to much testing here...


Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 07, 2011, 04:06:20 am
Also I would like to point out to this little tool... I get by it by mistake surfing the net... Anyone knows anything bout it? Seems to be very raw, but in the simple area... 

http://www.youtube.com/ADSKInf.....6lEq-WJqGo
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 07, 2011, 09:20:08 am
Well we will try over the coming years to approach the render quality of non real-time more and more of course. Up until a level that almost none can see the difference unless you are an expert!
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: mischa on January 07, 2011, 09:40:27 am
Gabriel,

what concerns the reflections of the trees and the big reflections. With the new version of Lumion that should be better a bit. You can know decide which objects should be reflected and only from which distance. Did not test this new function yet.

Images with alpha mask are working good. In the gallery I showed one sample of my first test I did in Lumion just at the beginning of Lumion, where I added several billboard people.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ola Stian on January 07, 2011, 01:09:04 pm
This guy http://www.unityterraintools.com/ has made a exellent tool for roads and side objects for Unity. Having something like this for Lumion would be a killer feature both for roads and to make rivers.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 07, 2011, 08:03:29 pm
mischa said:

Images with alpha mask are working good. In the gallery I showed one sample of my first test I did in Lumion just at the beginning of Lumion, where I added several billboard people.

 


I agree. What I was saying is that allthough the alpha mapped trees look awesome in lumion when exporting them to other formats they would most likely not look the same. From my previous tests with other softwares, they never looked the same as they looked in the software they were originally made. (if alpha mapped)

Therefore I greatly encourage to have all the things in one place. Importing/exporting as I allready stated before is bound to errors and a lot of extra work usually. That's why I encourage lumion team to get better still render results, and not put their work into exporting. Lumion should be made the final destination of the work, not "another tool" or plugin.


Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Frank on January 08, 2011, 12:39:23 am
with the "final destination" i do agree. Cool Really. No joke.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 08, 2011, 06:43:31 am
Ola Stian said:

This guy http://www.unityterraintools.com/ has made a exellent tool for roads and side objects for Unity. Having something like this for Lumion would be a killer feature both for roads and to make rivers.


 

It's a good example as to how a road system should work, still I've seen no sidewalks in their presentation. Only a textured surface sticked to the ground. Maybe the new version? I saw railroads there...


Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: zinoarchi on January 10, 2011, 02:31:56 pm
I have been busy with work for a while and could not manage to have a look at the forum.....but this thread seems to be more descriptive and hot with references than the Wishlist portion of the forum!!!Laugh.

I am a professional architect who is also involved in infrastructure (road, bridges, highways etc) sector. Gabriel, Mischa, Aaron and others have made some very interesting points regarding road modeling, lighting solutions and many other pros and cons of Lumion and other softwares which was definitely fun and informative. Thank you guys, very much! Also my congratulation goes to the Developer team of LUMION as they have been most responsive and specific on their vision and target as well.

I agree with Gabriel with almost every points. I use Archicad, 3ds Max and Vray for my Basic workflow. To show how Lumion fits in the Workflow, i have created a graphical chart (by the way, this is my opinion only) -



So IMHO, for 10-15% quality difference we are getting the fastest and easiest solution, thanks to Lumion.

Why
will I still be using LUMION for quick solution and VRAY or similar render
engines for final production ???



BTW, There is a superb
script called ENBseries for games like GTA4,
TES oblivion etc which enables  G.I.  and makes the environment look near to real. See here:
http://enbdev.com/ss_gta4_01_en.htm.



  • Interior with
    multiple light sources. (come on guys!....i
    have to use another render engine to bake texture and then use it in Lumion! That’s ridiculous!)





  • Vehicles have to turn
    right or left in roads or move up or down the ramps. Users’ who are looking for
    road editors and such should ask for this first!!! Same goes for peoples too,
    but for vehicles this is a must.  I think
    Move
    Items mode with path
    would
    be the solution!


There are many features LUMION can improve on or add to it's current state, but the above mentioned should be IMHO in the top priority list. I certainly understand the hard work the developer has been putting on this little soft and more feature requests are pouring in everyday, but to be the best solution for Architects, LUMION has to shorten the GAP between the quick+ ok quality and the quick +ultimate quality.


I apologize if i am offtopic but could not resist commenting here.

Cheers.Laugh
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on January 10, 2011, 03:43:56 pm
Congrats on the very nice workflow chart. It really says everything in fewer words. I agree with it 100%. 

 

Also, impressive images with the GI render in GTA 4. It gives a good glimpse of the future of GPU renders. I do not know how many lumion versions will pass until GI support in still renders, but it will be such a killer... so it'll be worth it. 

 

Indeed zinoarchi, i agree totaly that Lumion is the fastest and easiest solution. Until now architecture was always put in a niche, and nobody cared to do things easier for architects. In fact, most of the time architects work with already made objects when dealing with the environment. And it is ok, as the architect's attention should be on the building, and secondary on its surroundings.

 

They all considered that the architect should learn very hard softwares, that put away creativity, because there was never a "what you see is what you get" feature. All work needed a lot of try and error. It's hard to be creative with tools that hold you back... 
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: zinoarchi on January 10, 2011, 04:33:52 pm
Thanks Gabriel. I believe the Developer Team of Lumion will definitely make the necessary adjustments to make it a true "Architects' tool." So far, they have been superb like i have already mentioned in previous post.Laugh
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: msaly on January 16, 2011, 05:16:59 pm
1-Need moving camera can slow by (CTR) key as fast by shift.

2-In big scenes when select object for moving,have  problem with selection.for example when i want to select a tree from a bundle of theme,find correct tree is difficult.it need highlight like delete object.
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Ferry on January 17, 2011, 09:08:48 am
To make it perfect for architects like you we will need to create shortlist based on feedback and how long certain features take to get build. If you can try to make a post in the new features forum with lists in priority that will help us a lot. Single lines work best and start with small features that you think are really important and end with big features you think are really important.

 

Thank you
Title: My wishlist - conclusions regarding Lumion
Post by: Gabriel on February 02, 2011, 03:55:21 pm
Just found a software capable of doing exactly what i said earlier. This is the future in CG. So I would highly recommend moving ASAP to this solution for still pictures or even very high quality movies when the technology would permit. I think that they use a similar rendering solution as yours but with GI support? 

Title: 3D Computer Modeling a Landscape
Post by: RAD on May 28, 2011, 02:15:47 pm
 8)